Predator and Prey: Assault, harassment, and other aggressions in the entertainment industry

[Bastet]

1 minute ago, Spartan Girl said:

He could be lying about who is supporting him. I’m just saying…

I have zero trouble believing it about every single person listed.

[bluegirl147]

36 minutes ago, Bastet said:

I have zero trouble believing it about every single person listed.

I believe it too but it shows how manipulative Majors is.  He wants the focus off him and on to other people. And to some extent it is working.

[Blergh]

4 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

How nice the abuser has so many supporters. 

Yeah, sad so many folks chose to back the wrong horse instead of listening to the testimony much less considering what the alleged victim went through.

[Spartan Girl]

I hesitate to say this, but some people in the Black community would probably rather believe the victim is lying rather than admit that he’s an abusive asshole. That’s how it went down with the likes of Cosby, R. Kelly, and OJ Simpson. That’s patriarchy in a nutshell, in all races: the men always matter more.

[bluegirl147]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

I hesitate to say this, but some people in the Black community would probably rather believe the victim is lying rather than admit that he’s an abusive asshole. That’s how it went down with the likes of Cosby, R. Kelly, and OJ Simpson. That’s patriarchy in a nutshell, in all races: the men always matter more.

You aren't wrong but it's so disappointing seeing the celebs Majors thanked for their support.  I wonder if Courtney Vance's wife Angela Bassett was supportive as well.  I mean she portrayed one of the most famous domestic violence victims of all time.

[stonehaven]

It's not just the black patriarchy but there's some weird Hollywood thought that if an actor of some caliber is brought down by misdeeds, we still must respect the art and the legacy of that art. It has value and we SHOULD seperate the artist from the such cases. 

I have never understood that. If a plumber goes on a shooting rampage, do we get interviews with people saying "He must be forgiven because we can't forget the awesome kitchen island he helped install."? No other industry places performance over the person and by doing that they give the artists a level of protection, those out of the spotlight aren't afforded. Then Hollywood has the gall to lecture the rest of us on proper attitudes on so many issues when they protect their own at all costs. 

[Joimiaroxeu]

I can't wait to see which of the supporters Majors mentioned will be the first to do a movie or TV project with him. At this point probably only Tyler Perry will touch him and that certainly won't get him the kind of mainstream Hollywood recognition he needs to salvage his career.

[EtheltoTillie]

12 hours ago, Blergh said:

Yeah, sad so many folks chose to back the wrong horse instead of listening to the testimony much less considering what the alleged victim went through.

Get in line with Ashton and Mila . . . people should stop doing this!  Just stay silent.

Or better yet actually chastise the bad actor.

[Ohiopirate02]

10 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

I can't wait to see which of the supporters Majors mentioned will be the first to do a movie or TV project with him. At this point probably only Tyler Perry will touch him and that certainly won't get him the kind of mainstream Hollywood recognition he needs to salvage his career.

Out of all of those names, Tyler Perry is the least surprising. I would not have been shocked if Chris Rock was also listed. Both Tyler and Chris belong to the "bitches be crazy" school of thought, and that is the vibe I get from Jonathan's camp about his charges. His white girlfriend was a crazy bitch who abused him both verbally and physically, and in an moment of weakness, poor Jonathan had had enough and snapped. It wasn't his fault, he was just reacting to her. Complete and utter bullshit, but there is a large enough crowd that buys this. You will also notice how Jonathan began dating a black woman before his trial. I don't know anything about his new girlfriend, but I suspect she's the "right" type of black woman. I can't get over that story about him comparing himself to MLK, Jr. and looking for his Coretta.

[Joimiaroxeu]

4 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

You will also notice how Jonathan began dating a black woman before his trial. I don't know anything about his new girlfriend, but I suspect she's the "right" type of black woman.

The woman is Meagan Good, who's been a successful B-level actress since the 90s. She knows her way around Hollywood and in particular "Black Hollywood."

When Good showed up in relationship with Majors after his acting career fell apart, it always felt to me like a business arrangement, i.e., he's paying her to be seen with him.

Good has a new Tyler Perry movie coming out in July so Majors gets to ride her publicity wave. It's almost impressive how calculated his moves are but I doubt many of the true power players in the TV and film industry are buying it.

[GHScorpiosRule]

21 hours ago, Bastet said:

I have zero trouble believing it about every single person listed.

The only person who was listed that did shock me was that of Courtney B. Vance.

But the others? So not shocked or surprised. At all.

[Zella]

7 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

The only person who was listed that did shock me was that of Courtney B. Vance.

That surprised me too. 

[FilmTVGeek80]

18 hours ago, stonehaven said:

It's not just the black patriarchy but there's some weird Hollywood thought that if an actor of some caliber is brought down by misdeeds, we still must respect the art and the legacy of that art. It has value and we SHOULD seperate the artist from the such cases. 

I have never understood that. If a plumber goes on a shooting rampage, do we get interviews with people saying "He must be forgiven because we can't forget the awesome kitchen island he helped install."? No other industry places performance over the person and by doing that they give the artists a level of protection, those out of the spotlight aren't afforded. Then Hollywood has the gall to lecture the rest of us on proper attitudes on so many issues when they protect their own at all costs. 

A kitchen island and art are vastly different, and the masses have different emotional attachments. You don't see kitchen islands having fans and being loved by millions. And, in your analogy, most people aren't going to tear out their kitchen island because it was made by a criminal.  Just because someone turns out to be a terrible person doesn't mean the art they produce needs to disappear or can't be appreciated. And it's not just artists who think that separating the art from the artist makes sense. If people can't do it, that's fine, but I get that thought. Some people's personalities make it hard for me to watch whatever they do. But, some people, I don't care, and I can separate it. 

[Mabinogia]

3 hours ago, FilmTVGeek80 said:

Some people's personalities make it hard for me to watch whatever they do. But, some people, I don't care, and I can separate it. 

It all depends on the situation for me. Nothing is black and white. I have a harder time giving up some things after finding out their creator was a dirtbag than others. But once I find out someone has done something that I personally am against (murder, rape, using their power to harm other people, harming animals, etc) I won't watch anything they do going forward. You can't miss what you don't watch in the first place. If they are dead then I have no problem watching their stuff as they can't profit from it any longer. 

[Trini]

11 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

When Good showed up in relationship with Majors after his acting career fell apart, it always felt to me like a business arrangement, i.e., he's paying her to be seen with him.

Same. I'm like, 'girl - do you really need that money that bad??' whenever I've seen her with him. Praying for her.

[bluegirl147]

19 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

It's almost impressive how calculated his moves are but I doubt many of the true power players in the TV and film industry are buying it.

Yes I feel like everything he has done since his arrest has been PR moves.  I do find interesting who hasn't spoken out in support of him.  Michael B. Jordan as far as I know hasn't said anything.  If I'm not mistaken before Majors domestic violence came to light he was supposed to do more Creed movies.  

19 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

The only person who was listed that did shock me was that of Courtney B. Vance.

We don't know for certain if he does in fact support Majors.  All  he said was he and Vance go back to Lovecraft Country.  And that was 2020.  But as far as Whoopi Goldberg goes I have zero trouble believing she wholeheartedly supports a convicted domestic abuser. This is the same woman who made light of Roman Polanski raping a young girl as not rape rape. Defended Michael Vick running a dog fighting ring.  Had to have the Bill Cosby case explained to her like she was a child.

 

13 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

But once I find out someone has done something that I personally am against (murder, rape, using their power to harm other people, harming animals, etc) I won't watch anything they do going forward

Same. And sadly my list is getting longer.

13 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

If they are dead then I have no problem watching their stuff as they can't profit from it any longer. 

It still took me years after his death to listen to Michael Jackson again. Still feel icky when I do.  Even after R Kelly is dead and buried I will still never listen to him again.

[GHScorpiosRule]

14 minutes ago, bluegirl147 said:

We don't know for certain if he does in fact support Majors.  All  he said was he and Vance go back to Lovecraft Country.  And that was 2020.  But as far as Whoopi Goldberg goes I have zero trouble believing she wholeheartedly supports a convicted domestic abuser. This is the same woman who made light of Roman Polanski raping a young girl as not rape rape. Defended Michael Vick running a dog fighting ring.  Had to have the Bill Cosby case explained to her like she was a child.

Ah, I see. I only saw his name, and didn't feel like clicking on the actual link.

As for Whoopi, I'm right there with you, and for the reasons stated above. She even went as far to warn her co-hosts to "watch it" when it looked like they were going to criticize another whack job-Tom Cruise-yesterday on The View.

And I bet she's also an OJ defender. And even though Abrams explained Cosby to her, as you stated, as if she were a child-she still defends him. And Mel Gibson.

[bluegirl147]

4 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

. And even though Abrams explained Cosby to her, as you stated, as if she were a child-she still defends him. And Mel Gibson.

Whoopi's father wasn't around too much when she was growing up so I think she has always looked for approval from black men. And it was two famous white men (Mike Nichols and Steven Spielberg) who helped her career when she was starting out so I think she will always side with famous men black or white.

[Zella]

2 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

And I bet she's also an OJ defender.

Vance being outspoken that he thought OJ was guilty during interviews about The People V. OJ Simpson, in which he played Johnnie Cochran, was one reason I was surprised his name was mentioned as supporting Majors. 

But @bluegirl147 makes a good point about the context in which his name is mentioned. Majors evokes it rather obliquely. if Vance doesn't in fact support him, that's a really manipulative thing to do, but definitely one that many abusers are very adept at. 

[BetterButter]

Diplo Accused of Distributing Revenge Porn in New Lawsuit

Quote

The suit, filed in California on Thursday, is the second claim brought against the DJ and producer in recent years for disseminating sexual recordings.

 

[merylinkid]

I always side eye those who wholeheartedly support abusers, like no nuance as in "I'm waiting for all the facts" or "people are complex" or "I support the person not the act"  (that last one sucks but I kinda get it).   But just "wonderful person, doesn't deserve to be treated this way."   I go "what are YOU doing that you think this person shouldn't be held accountable?   What don't you want us to know about YOU?"

[Vermicious Knid]

‘The Umbrella Academy’ Showrunner Steve Blackman Accused of Toxic and Sexist Behavior

[peachmangosteen]

DAMMIT! I feel like there are virtually no shows that don't have toxicity bts. It's a real bummer.

[bluegirl147]

1 hour ago, peachmangosteen said:

DAMMIT! I feel like there are virtually no shows that don't have toxicity bts. It's a real bummer.

It's true. At this point it would be news for a show to not have a predator on staff.

[BetterButter]

Neil Gaiman has been accused of sexual assault

Quote

A new report contains allegations from two women who accuse the American Gods author of nonconsensual acts

 

[Palimelon]

French film director Benoît Jacquot charged with raping two actors.

[Affogato]

On 7/1/2024 at 11:10 AM, bluegirl147 said:

It's true. At this point it would be news for a show to not have a predator on staff.

The answer is probably that it is fairly common, given the tight circumstances. 

[Notabug]

18 hours ago, Palimelon said:

French film director Benoît Jacquot charged with raping two actors.

Not just raping 2 actors, but actors who were underage.  He supposedly had 'relationships' with both who were mid teens when he pursued them.  He was in his late 20's in the first case and over 60 in the second.  So not just rape, but pedophilia.

[Makai]

On 7/3/2024 at 7:27 PM, BetterButter said:

Neil Gaiman has been accused of sexual assault

 

 

Another case where his defense just convinces me the women are telling the truth. Dude, you’re a rich and famous man in your 60’s “cuddling” and making out with your 21-year old employee on her first day of work. If you can’t see how that would impact a person’s ability to consent you clearly have no clue about consent. 

Edited July 7 by Makai

[Bastet]

Chef Justin Sutherland, of Wildcard Kitchen, Fast Foodies, Top Chef, Tournament of Champions, and more, has been arrested and charged after allegedly choking his girlfriend, pointing a gun at her, and threatening to kill her.

[Lugal]

On 7/3/2024 at 7:27 PM, BetterButter said:

Neil Gaiman has been accused of sexual assault

 

Lawrence Miles, who is not known for getting along with, well, anybody and never leaving a bridge unburnt did once refer to Gaiman as a "stinking parasite who'll stop at nothing to cop off on goth girls."

[Affogato]

1 hour ago, Makai said:

 

Another case where his defense just convinces me the women are telling the truth. Dude, you’re a rich and famous man in your 40’s “cuddling” and making out with your 21-year old employee on her first day of work. If you can’t see how that would impact a person ability to consent you clearly have no clue about consent. 

Why would he have any sex with the babysitter?

[Notabug]

Just now, Affogato said:

Why would he have any sex with the babysitter?

What was he doing taking a bath with her on her first day of work?  She was hired as a nanny, apparently, he thought she was HIS nanny.

[Affogato]

17 minutes ago, Notabug said:

What was he doing taking a bath with her on her first day of work?  She was hired as a nanny, apparently, he thought she was HIS nanny.

Sometimes I wonder if they are actually aliens, these men.  They would have just met. Really wtf?

this is pretty predatory whether she consented or not, imo. 

Edited July 6 by Affogato

[Makai]

2 hours ago, Notabug said:

What was he doing taking a bath with her on her first day of work?  She was hired as a nanny, apparently, he thought she was HIS nanny.

Exactly. It’s crazy that he apparently thinks that was a good defense. Although the really disturbing thing is that a large part of his fanbase will see nothing wrong with it. It apparently was an open secret that he slept with many young fans, students and interns. 

Edited July 7 by Makai

[Zella]

I never really had an opinion on Gaiman, despite having a lot of friends who were really avid fans. I liked the one book of his I read, but I never was interested in following him or his career. But I remember being super weirded out back during the initial COVID lockdowns when he suddenly just left his family in New Zealand and returned to the UK. I remember at the time a lot of people throwing his wife under the bus, but I always felt that, regardless of what was going on, that didn't reflect well on him. Had no idea about the accusations of sleeping with fans, but he really does sound like a piece of work. 

Edited July 8 by Zella

[Affogato]

1 hour ago, Makai said:

Exactly. It’s crazy that he apparently thinks that was a good defense. Although the really disturbing thing is that a large part of his fanbase will see nothing wrong with it. It apparently was an open secret that he slept with many young fans, students and interns. 

Oddly, youngish consenting fans is less weird than the nanny incident. The not listening to ‘no’ as well is disturbing. Sleeping with youngish willing fans, not employees or potential employees, is just consensual sex. 

[Blergh]

Where was Gaiman's child's mother. .and for that matter child when all this went on (and even his 'defense' seemed to point to, at the very least, very inappropriate actions on his part to an employee- especially one who was there  to be caring for his child)?

I'm not blaming ANYone besides Gaiman himself for what happened but I just wonder where the others were when this happened (and the child's mother COULD be an ally for the onetime employee).

[peachmangosteen]

11 hours ago, Affogato said:

Sleeping with youngish willing fans, not employees or potential employees, is just consensual sex. 

Not necessarily.

[Affogato]

1 minute ago, peachmangosteen said:

Not necessarily.

well, no,  but then something else would be happening to make it non consensual sex. 

when people become adults in the eyes of the law they are allowed certain liberties. A 21 year old woman is allowed to decide to sleep with a 50 year old man. You may think it is a bad idea, but that really is not your decision to make.  Furthermore, micromanaging people’s sex lives is dangerous in itself. If someone lets you manage their sex lives they are more likely to let you make other decisions for them. Many cults use this ploy. 
 

if some well liked writer, for example, has orgies with fans at conventions without breaking the law, it is okay. You don’t have to participate.
 

Some of the participants may even regret it later and that should also be okay. Regret is part of life. Regret having sex that one time, regret eating a boatload of ice cream and gaining weight, decisions have consequences and outcomes. 

 

[JustHereForFood]

10 hours ago, Blergh said:

Where was Gaiman's child's mother. .and for that matter child when all this went on (and even his 'defense' seemed to point to, at the very least, very inappropriate actions on his part to an employee- especially one who was there  to be caring for his child)?

I'm not blaming ANYone besides Gaiman himself for what happened but I just wonder where the others were when this happened (and the child's mother COULD be an ally for the onetime employee).

From the additional info I've read, the nanny was a friend of Amanda and was hired by her. They also had open marriage, so apart from him pursuing their employee (with some already crossed boundaries between employee and friend), she might not see anything wrong about it.

[peachmangosteen]

Quote

well, no,  but then something else would be happening to make it non consensual sex. 

when people become adults in the eyes of the law they are allowed certain liberties. A 21 year old woman is allowed to decide to sleep with a 50 year old man. You may think it is a bad idea, but that really is not your decision to make.  Furthermore, micromanaging people’s sex lives is dangerous in itself. If someone lets you manage their sex lives they are more likely to let you make other decisions for them. Many cults use this ploy. 
 

if some well liked writer, for example, has orgies with fans at conventions without breaking the law, it is okay. You don’t have to participate.
 

Some of the participants may even regret it later and that should also be okay. Regret is part of life. Regret having sex that one time, regret eating a boatload of ice cream and gaining weight, decisions have consequences and outcomes. 

It depends on the circumstances. It's a grey area and, to quote Bottoms, 'grey area stuff counts.'

Edited July 7 by peachmangosteen

[JustHereForFood]

3 minutes ago, Affogato said:

well, no,  but then something else would be happening to make it non consensual sex. 

when people become adults in the eyes of the law they are allowed certain liberties. A 21 year old woman is allowed to decide to sleep with a 50 year old man. You may think it is a bad idea, but that really is not your decision to make.  Furthermore, micromanaging people’s sex lives is dangerous in itself. If someone lets you manage their sex lives they are more likely to let you make other decisions for them. Many cults use this ploy. 
 

if some well liked writer, for example, has orgies with fans at conventions without breaking the law, it is okay. You don’t have to participate.
 

Some of the participants may even regret it later and that should also be okay. Regret is part of life. Regret having sex that one time, regret eating a boatload of ice cream and gaining weight, decisions have consequences and outcomes. 

 

This new trend of "something something... your brain does not mature until 25 therefore you can't make some decisions about your life" has become so toxic. Apart from how much it was spread by transphobes to keep adults from transitioning (and they have already suceeded in some cases), it is also used to infantilize adult women who want to sleep with whomever the social media crowd deems problematic (I'm not talking about situations where there are further issues like here). Funny, how it's never used to influence drinking age, driving age, gun-purchasing, choosing your future career, joining the army, etc.

[Affogato]

44 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

It depends on the circumstances. It's a grey area and, to quote Bottoms, 'grey area stuff counts.'

I don’t actually understand this.
 

Two 50 year old people can marry and she can turn out to be a malignant narcissist. And he will have made a horrible mistake and spend his next decade getting away from her. We all know decisions can go well and go badly. 

[Makai]

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/master-the-allegations-against-neil-gaiman-episode-1/id1487320403?i=1000660908731
 

I read the transcript for the episode where the nanny describes what happened. She was a fan of Amanda Palmer (Gaiman’s wife at the time) and they became friendly after meeting on the street. Palmer got her tickets to a show and started asked her to run errands and babysit occasionally. Then she decided to hire her as a nanny who would go between Palmer and Gaiman’s houses with the child. When the bath incident happened the kid was at a play date. 

The nanny says she did eventually tell Palmer and was told she was the 14th woman to come to Palmer. The podcast also claims (I’m not sure if this came from the nanny or someone else) that Palmer called and warned Gaiman telling him to keep is distance from the nanny. 

4 hours ago, Affogato said:

Some of the participants may even regret it later and that should also be okay. Regret is part of life. Regret having sex that one time, regret eating a boatload of ice cream and gaining weight, decisions have consequences and outcomes. 

True but in these situations it’s not unusual for that regret to come with the realization that the behavior of the older partner was deeply problematic and possibly predatory. So what was viewed as consensual at the time may not actually be consensual. 

[Affogato]

58 minutes ago, Makai said:

 

True but in these situations it’s not unusual for that regret to come with the realization that the behavior of the older partner was deeply problematic and possibly predatory. So what was viewed as consensual at the time may not actually be consensual. 

I may deeply regret buying an extended warranty, and seller may be said to prey on the naive.  I’m probably stuck with it.  Same with those jeans I bought two sizes too small so I would lose weight. 
 

maybe i can take part in a class action suit against the weight loss pills that did nothing. 
 

Although, seriously, reserving the right to shift blame onto the other person at any time is a slippery slope. 

Consenting to have sex with an older famous person because they are famous does not mean you were preyed on. It is, if consensual, not even problematic.  In the future it may or may not be your proudest moment. 
 

apparently there were oroblematic aspects, like some acts were not consented to and the withdrawal of consent was ignored  this is the problemstic part. 

 

Edited July 7 by Affogato

[Shrek]

1 hour ago, Makai said:

 So what was viewed as consensual at the time may not actually be consensual. 

That is an extremely slippery slope.

What you're saying is that anyone who has ever had sex with anyone besides themselves can at any time be sued, tried & convicted because anyone that they ever had consensual sex with decided to change their mind about it being consensual decades later. 

Thankfully that is not how most places work at the moment although it might in the future if some people get their way.

 

[Blergh]

Regardless of what kind of bond Gaiman and his coparent may have had, it sure sounds as though that employee virtually instantly wound up over her head and plunged into something she'd likely have NOT wanted her bestie or hypothetical future daughter to have gotten into- and let's not had forget evidently had sought employment ONLY to help with their child's caregiving.

Edited July 7 by Blergh

[Makai]

38 minutes ago, Shrek said:

What you're saying is that anyone who has ever had sex with anyone besides themselves can at any time be sued, tried & convicted because anyone that they ever had consensual sex with decided to change their mind about it being consensual decades later. 

No, that isn’t what I am saying. I was not speaking to the legality of the issue or saying that consent can be revoked retroactively. 

I am saying that in real world situations consent is often muddled. I am a big believer in the importance of affirmative consent to protect everyone involved. 

Problematic and predatory behavior is often completely legal but being legal doesn’t prevent societal consequences. 

Edited July 7 by Makai

[Annber03]

7 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

This new trend of "something something... your brain does not mature until 25 therefore you can't make some decisions about your life" has become so toxic. Apart from how much it was spread by transphobes to keep adults from transitioning (and they have already suceeded in some cases), it is also used to infantilize adult women who want to sleep with whomever the social media crowd deems problematic (I'm not talking about situations where there are further issues like here). Funny, how it's never used to influence drinking age, driving age, gun-purchasing, choosing your future career, joining the army, etc.

The whole "your brain doesn't mature until 25" thing has also been proven to be junk science, or at least, it's been completelyl misunderstood, one of the two.

I fully agree that once someone is of legal age, they have the right to decide whomever they want to date and sleep with, no matter how much older their partner may be. Age gaps between adults of consenting/legal age in and of themselves are not inherently bad and should not be seen as such. Yes, there can be some issues between people of vastly different ages, in terms of where they are in their lives and their generational reference points and whatnot, but those kinds of things can also be just as big of problems with people who are closer in age, too. It's all in how the couple chooses to make it work and how serious they want to be with each other. 

I also think that if someone of Gaiman's age has a tendency to focus largely on dating people significantly younger than them, that has less to do with genuine connection and more likely to do with the fact that they know younger people will be easier for them to impress, or, if they're more predatory in nature, to manipulate/control. There's a reason they seem to have trouble attracting someone closer to their own age - people closer to their own age have a litlte more life experience and aren't as impressed by their BS as easily. 

Again, that's not always the case, no. But I do think it does seem to be a common and recurring theme, especially when it's a prominent and famous person constantly pursuing much younger people.